Of course. Profit taking is inherently evil, and any kind of activism, from peaceful demonstrations to outright acts of terrorism, are inherently good as long as it is sticking it to the Man (and profit is not a factor).
The above poster's knowledge of Western classical music is one gigantic swath of ignorance. Nearly every statement he/she has made on the subject has been either falsified with concrete, real-world examples, or demonstrated to be complete nonsense. I would think most people would have the humility to not expound on subjects they know nothing about, and that such posts would be modded down. I was wrong.
If someone prefers Radiohead to Mozart, that's their personal choice, and neither here nor there. But to claim their music harmonically and emotionally more sophisticated than anything produced by Western Civilization in at least the 18th century and first part of the 19th (and probably beyond that as well) is the height of absurdity. There really is no point in trying to argue that any more than a geneticist trying to argue for evolution in a panel of Young Earth Creationists.
The qualifier "popular" is a red herring by the way. What's popular today does not translate into what was popular in Bach and Handel's day. The pieces that are popular today are so because they have withstood the test of time, and continue to fascinate as well as entertain 300 years later.
Next +5 comment coming up is probably an argument that the character development in the script to last Friday's WWE Smackdown is more nuanced than Hamlet.
I've probably garnered some negative Karma here for this post, but when I see such gross ignorance paraded here as above, and to get modded up by the way, I can only shake my head in disbelief.
Don Giovanni is categorically not pop music of its day; it was written for an aristocratic elite. Popular music in the 18th century consisted of sheet music that was widely disseminated, and easy enough for amateurs to play at home (but often could be simplified versions of operatic numbers, etc.)
As for it's "harmonious backing in straight major and minor chords," you need only look at the first few bars of the overture to see that is not true: after the crashing D minor and A major chords that begin, the harmony moves right away to a diminished 7th chord on G sharp. I have the score at home, and could probably find scores, if not hundreds of exceptions to your claim.
For such a "simple story," the likes of E.T.A Hoffmann, Kierkegaard, Flaubert, G.B. Shaw, and others could spill a lot of ink writing about it.
The Brandenburg Concertos would qualify as "popular Bach"; I would challenge anyone to name a piece of popular music from the last 50 years that is as harmonically complex as these. I know there's a lot of Progressive Rock that uses sophisticated harmonies, but not in the same league as the Brandenburgs.
Could you please list these rock and hip-hop songs that are vastly rhythmically, emotionally, and tonally more sophisticated than any of the popular Bach, Mozart, Handel, and Beethoven era works (which covers roughly 125 years, and includes many works that are generally considered crowning achievements of Western civilization)? I have no idea what you mean about your Radiohead/Magic Flute comparison, but writing such nonsense as "Jimi Hendrix throws more sophisticated chords into a single song than you'll hear in the whole of Don Giovanni" suggests you have never listened to any of Mozart's operas. Never.
I'm probably going to get modded down, but this same BS argument that the DPRK and Iran want their own nukes to stave off any potential invasion by US/UK gets trotted out over and over again. Even if those country had the means to deliver a nuclear payload to Washington or London (which in itself is no mean feat), the response would be so devastatingly overwhelming, they would have to be suicidally insane to even consider it. Besides which, a few nukes would not be a "great equalizer" against a superior conventional force, as they have too tactical applications to be effective, besides being costly and bringing all the negative repercussions associated any nuclear weapon.
Slashdot Mirror
The US did not create the Taliban. The Taliban emerged from Pakistani madrassas in the early 1990s, well after the Soviets withdrew.
Because most of live in a part of the universe where Euclidean Geometry gives a better approximation of the local coordinate system.
No TFA stated that the amount of 4-MEI consumed by mice in the study would be equivalent to 12,000 ounces consumed *per day*.
Of course. Profit taking is inherently evil, and any kind of activism, from peaceful demonstrations to outright acts of terrorism, are inherently good as long as it is sticking it to the Man (and profit is not a factor).
...by eating Dannon Yogurt.
+5 Interesting for the above post? Really!
The above poster's knowledge of Western classical music is one gigantic swath of ignorance. Nearly every statement he/she has made on the subject has been either falsified with concrete, real-world examples, or demonstrated to be complete nonsense. I would think most people would have the humility to not expound on subjects they know nothing about, and that such posts would be modded down. I was wrong.
If someone prefers Radiohead to Mozart, that's their personal choice, and neither here nor there. But to claim their music harmonically and emotionally more sophisticated than anything produced by Western Civilization in at least the 18th century and first part of the 19th (and probably beyond that as well) is the height of absurdity. There really is no point in trying to argue that any more than a geneticist trying to argue for evolution in a panel of Young Earth Creationists.
The qualifier "popular" is a red herring by the way. What's popular today does not translate into what was popular in Bach and Handel's day. The pieces that are popular today are so because they have withstood the test of time, and continue to fascinate as well as entertain 300 years later.
Next +5 comment coming up is probably an argument that the character development in the script to last Friday's WWE Smackdown is more nuanced than Hamlet.
I've probably garnered some negative Karma here for this post, but when I see such gross ignorance paraded here as above, and to get modded up by the way, I can only shake my head in disbelief.
Don Giovanni is categorically not pop music of its day; it was written for an aristocratic elite. Popular music in the 18th century consisted of sheet music that was widely disseminated, and easy enough for amateurs to play at home (but often could be simplified versions of operatic numbers, etc.)
As for it's "harmonious backing in straight major and minor chords," you need only look at the first few bars of the overture to see that is not true: after the crashing D minor and A major chords that begin, the harmony moves right away to a diminished 7th chord on G sharp. I have the score at home, and could probably find scores, if not hundreds of exceptions to your claim.
For such a "simple story," the likes of E.T.A Hoffmann, Kierkegaard, Flaubert, G.B. Shaw, and others could spill a lot of ink writing about it.
The Brandenburg Concertos would qualify as "popular Bach"; I would challenge anyone to name a piece of popular music from the last 50 years that is as harmonically complex as these. I know there's a lot of Progressive Rock that uses sophisticated harmonies, but not in the same league as the Brandenburgs.
Could you please list these rock and hip-hop songs that are vastly rhythmically, emotionally, and tonally more sophisticated than any of the popular Bach, Mozart, Handel, and Beethoven era works (which covers roughly 125 years, and includes many works that are generally considered crowning achievements of Western civilization)? I have no idea what you mean about your Radiohead/Magic Flute comparison, but writing such nonsense as "Jimi Hendrix throws more sophisticated chords into a single song than you'll hear in the whole of Don Giovanni" suggests you have never listened to any of Mozart's operas. Never.
And studies have shown that red light cameras *decrease* crashes.
http://www.transalt.org/files/newsroom/reports/slowingspeeds.html
Can you cite one American news media story that refers to it as the "NASA Space Station" instead of the "ISS" or "International Space Station"?
I'm probably going to get modded down, but this same BS argument that the DPRK and Iran want their own nukes to stave off any potential invasion by US/UK gets trotted out over and over again. Even if those country had the means to deliver a nuclear payload to Washington or London (which in itself is no mean feat), the response would be so devastatingly overwhelming, they would have to be suicidally insane to even consider it. Besides which, a few nukes would not be a "great equalizer" against a superior conventional force, as they have too tactical applications to be effective, besides being costly and bringing all the negative repercussions associated any nuclear weapon.